I went to a competitive academic school long ago on athletic scholarship (at a highly ranked academic school). Unlike the author, I had virtually no parental support - my single divorced mother was unemployed and often ill. So I was stuck on scholarship - and felt that pressure all four years. My brother was a national level high school runner too - he went to school on athletic scholarship and feels the same way now as I do. He posts here occasionally, and is world renowned in his field - track and field is in the distant rear view mirror for both of us.

I was a good student - so I always found solace notwithstanding the stress and the pressure - I truly felt privileged to obtain an education - every day I couldn't believe I had the same chance at an education as the generally extremely wealthy kids who were my classmates. I don't quite get the author's reaction at the wealth of her classmates - sure I felt out of place, but heck, get me in the classroom - where I could learn and escape from the dull union gig I held for 8 weeks in the summer - and I was so excited I didn't care how much money other people had. There wasn't a day that went by that I didn't think I was one of the luckiest people around - coming from nothing and having nothing - to have this land in my lap.

And certainly I didn't have eating disorder issues. If I didn't eat junk and kept my mileage up (not easy because I never was a high mileage runner - a 35 mile a week guy at most in high school), I ran at 132 instead of 138. So I fortunately cannot relate to the eating disorder thing - it is foreign to me - but of course the science today informs me to take it very seriously.

In any event, to the parents who really think that a scholarship is a be all and end all - think again. It is a different world today - internships - planning for a career - they for most of us are really important - and athletics must be put in perspective. College athletics if not handled properly serves to gratuitously postpone adolescence - I am not sure that is healthy. To the parent with the nationally ranked daughter several pages back, I would suggest putting her education first. If she wants to run, believe me, she will find a way to do it - hopefully in a way that permits expression in other aspects of her life.

By the way, I was not close to my coach and never connected with him, but he was a good guy. He was a track coach - that's all. And the administration of the school, as well as my department head who pushed me into an elite academic program, were fantastic. They were a far greater influence on me than my coach. So while I really did not enjoy my college athletic experience all that much, it was more because it was not a match with my interests more than anything else.

I vowed when I had a family my own kids would never worry about debt or an education. They are great students at the nation's very best colleges. And they are productive, happy and developing. My wife and I made it clear early on that athletics was for fun. (I met my wife in college - a serious student with a calm perspective on life who hails from a stable family and who was not at all an athlete. Hopefully, this young woman can adopt the same kind of perspective as she moves on - although an eating disorder may be so life altering to make that very challenging.

And I find this Title IX stuff silly. Look, most intelligent men are not troglodytes - they support the concept behind Title IX - indeed I do. And I don't support the misogynist drivel about women not being athletes - they are different than men - but can express tremendous athletic talent. But Title IX should be applied reasonably, and not mechanically and in a way that capriciously deprives men of opportunity. Look, football is so obscene from an academic and economic perspective - but good luck changing it. Let's recognize football for what it is - and set it aside and implement parity in terms of athletic support without football in play. And use a little common sense - take - for example, JMU - a school with a 60/40 ratio where the women would happily like more men to attend - axed the men's track and cross country programs - even less men will now attend - what progress is that?

I'm depressed and this story is making me more depressed and making me wonder if I have an eating disorder. My health insurance covers mental health and I called a psychologist twice five days apart. I can't get a shrink to call me back. How depressing.

DocB

RE: She was once a runner5/23/2011 12:18AM - in reply to Unlogged in UP

The writer's IP address is in Westbury, New York. Danielle Jelley went to Westbury High School. Can we stop debating the identity of the writer and discuss the fictional story?

So he drinks a zero-calorie drink after telling her to increase her calorie intake. Would he be a hypocrit if he drank water instead of diet coke? It sounds like she is finally getting the help she needs but there are hints in the writing that her reality is so distorted that she will not take full advantage of the help.

4runner wrote:When an adult actress agrees to lose weight for a role, she enters into that contact with an understanding of what that means. When a teenage girl gets recruited by a coach who promises to be her "coach" or her "mentor," the situation is very different.

College runners are 17 or 18 when they sign for a scholarship and almost all of them are 18 by the time they start freshman year or within a month or two. They are adults. Maybe not that experienced as adults but they are adults. They get to make their own decisions in life.

Mr. Obvious wrote:College runners are 17 or 18 when they sign for a scholarship and almost all of them are 18 by the time they start freshman year or within a month or two. They are adults. Maybe not that experienced as adults but they are adults. They get to make their own decisions in life.

Mr. Obvious wrote:College runners are 17 or 18 when they sign for a scholarship and almost all of them are 18 by the time they start freshman year or within a month or two. They are adults. Maybe not that experienced as adults but they are adults. They get to make their own decisions in life.

1) Most states think that 18 is the year of capacity to enter into a contract. Much of the recruiting process is generally done while runners are juveniles.

2) How upfront are coaches about the weight loss requirements?

Has any coach in the history of the world ever said: --"___% of my runners have eating disorders?"--"If you want to run for me, I consider myself entitled to badger you about your weight."--"I'll keep running a girl even after she has an eating disorder if it helps me win."

If the coaches are not upfront and honest about such requirements, it is no different than selling a used car with a known defect to your own 17 year old nephew.

scholarships come with a price wrote:I went to a competitive academic school long ago on athletic scholarship (at a highly ranked academic school). Unlike the author, I had virtually no parental support - my single divorced mother was unemployed and often ill. So I was stuck on scholarship - and felt that pressure all four years. My brother was a national level high school runner too - he went to school on athletic scholarship and feels the same way now as I do. He posts here occasionally, and is world renowned in his field - track and field is in the distant rear view mirror for both of us.

I was a good student - so I always found solace notwithstanding the stress and the pressure - I truly felt privileged to obtain an education - every day I couldn't believe I had the same chance at an education as the generally extremely wealthy kids who were my classmates. I don't quite get the author's reaction at the wealth of her classmates - sure I felt out of place, but heck, get me in the classroom - where I could learn and escape from the dull union gig I held for 8 weeks in the summer - and I was so excited I didn't care how much money other people had. There wasn't a day that went by that I didn't think I was one of the luckiest people around - coming from nothing and having nothing - to have this land in my lap.

And certainly I didn't have eating disorder issues. If I didn't eat junk and kept my mileage up (not easy because I never was a high mileage runner - a 35 mile a week guy at most in high school), I ran at 132 instead of 138. So I fortunately cannot relate to the eating disorder thing - it is foreign to me - but of course the science today informs me to take it very seriously.

In any event, to the parents who really think that a scholarship is a be all and end all - think again. It is a different world today - internships - planning for a career - they for most of us are really important - and athletics must be put in perspective. College athletics if not handled properly serves to gratuitously postpone adolescence - I am not sure that is healthy. To the parent with the nationally ranked daughter several pages back, I would suggest putting her education first. If she wants to run, believe me, she will find a way to do it - hopefully in a way that permits expression in other aspects of her life.

By the way, I was not close to my coach and never connected with him, but he was a good guy. He was a track coach - that's all. And the administration of the school, as well as my department head who pushed me into an elite academic program, were fantastic. They were a far greater influence on me than my coach. So while I really did not enjoy my college athletic experience all that much, it was more because it was not a match with my interests more than anything else.

I vowed when I had a family my own kids would never worry about debt or an education. They are great students at the nation's very best colleges. And they are productive, happy and developing. My wife and I made it clear early on that athletics was for fun. (I met my wife in college - a serious student with a calm perspective on life who hails from a stable family and who was not at all an athlete. Hopefully, this young woman can adopt the same kind of perspective as she moves on - although an eating disorder may be so life altering to make that very challenging.

And I find this Title IX stuff silly. Look, most intelligent men are not troglodytes - they support the concept behind Title IX - indeed I do. And I don't support the misogynist drivel about women not being athletes - they are different than men - but can express tremendous athletic talent. But Title IX should be applied reasonably, and not mechanically and in a way that capriciously deprives men of opportunity. Look, football is so obscene from an academic and economic perspective - but good luck changing it. Let's recognize football for what it is - and set it aside and implement parity in terms of athletic support without football in play. And use a little common sense - take - for example, JMU - a school with a 60/40 ratio where the women would happily like more men to attend - axed the men's track and cross country programs - even less men will now attend - what progress is that?

scholarships come with a price wrote:I went to a competitive academic school long ago on athletic scholarship (at a highly ranked academic school). Unlike the author, I had virtually no parental support - my single divorced mother was unemployed and often ill. So I was stuck on scholarship - and felt that pressure all four years. My brother was a national level high school runner too - he went to school on athletic scholarship and feels the same way now as I do. He posts here occasionally, and is world renowned in his field - track and field is in the distant rear view mirror for both of us.

I was a good student - so I always found solace notwithstanding the stress and the pressure - I truly felt privileged to obtain an education - every day I couldn't believe I had the same chance at an education as the generally extremely wealthy kids who were my classmates. I don't quite get the author's reaction at the wealth of her classmates - sure I felt out of place, but heck, get me in the classroom - where I could learn and escape from the dull union gig I held for 8 weeks in the summer - and I was so excited I didn't care how much money other people had. There wasn't a day that went by that I didn't think I was one of the luckiest people around - coming from nothing and having nothing - to have this land in my lap.

And certainly I didn't have eating disorder issues. If I didn't eat junk and kept my mileage up (not easy because I never was a high mileage runner - a 35 mile a week guy at most in high school), I ran at 132 instead of 138. So I fortunately cannot relate to the eating disorder thing - it is foreign to me - but of course the science today informs me to take it very seriously.

In any event, to the parents who really think that a scholarship is a be all and end all - think again. It is a different world today - internships - planning for a career - they for most of us are really important - and athletics must be put in perspective. College athletics if not handled properly serves to gratuitously postpone adolescence - I am not sure that is healthy. To the parent with the nationally ranked daughter several pages back, I would suggest putting her education first. If she wants to run, believe me, she will find a way to do it - hopefully in a way that permits expression in other aspects of her life.

By the way, I was not close to my coach and never connected with him, but he was a good guy. He was a track coach - that's all. And the administration of the school, as well as my department head who pushed me into an elite academic program, were fantastic. They were a far greater influence on me than my coach. So while I really did not enjoy my college athletic experience all that much, it was more because it was not a match with my interests more than anything else.

I vowed when I had a family my own kids would never worry about debt or an education. They are great students at the nation's very best colleges. And they are productive, happy and developing. My wife and I made it clear early on that athletics was for fun. (I met my wife in college - a serious student with a calm perspective on life who hails from a stable family and who was not at all an athlete. Hopefully, this young woman can adopt the same kind of perspective as she moves on - although an eating disorder may be so life altering to make that very challenging.

And I find this Title IX stuff silly. Look, most intelligent men are not troglodytes - they support the concept behind Title IX - indeed I do. And I don't support the misogynist drivel about women not being athletes - they are different than men - but can express tremendous athletic talent. But Title IX should be applied reasonably, and not mechanically and in a way that capriciously deprives men of opportunity. Look, football is so obscene from an academic and economic perspective - but good luck changing it. Let's recognize football for what it is - and set it aside and implement parity in terms of athletic support without football in play. And use a little common sense - take - for example, JMU - a school with a 60/40 ratio where the women would happily like more men to attend - axed the men's track and cross country programs - even less men will now attend - what progress is that?

Honestly, are the women posting on this thread saying coaches should never tell female runners to lose weight?

I had a college freshman last year who was more than a full minute slower than her high school PR.

She also gained 10-12 pounds -- her estimate -- from her weight when she ran her PR.

So, I am a horrible person for telling her that the weight gain is probably one of the factors? (She studies a ton for her excellent grades so sleep deprivation is clearly an issue, too.)

This is an intelligent young woman with a 4.0 GPA who wants to improve.

So while 6 of my top 7 women and 8 of the top 10 had new PRs in the fall, she didn't. The freshmen -- not counting her -- had an average PR improvement in the fall of more than 60 seconds.

I wouldn't have minded if she'd gained 5 pounds of muscle. But her butt is bigger and so are her thighs. It's not muscle, and yes, I'm a pervert for looking...

Too many people on this thread seem to believe if you tell a young woman she has gained weight that the next thing she'll do is stick her finger down her throat.

I don't think every female needs to be treated like a porcelain princess. That being said, I'm horribly imperfect, so tell me what to do with this young lady besides having frank talks with her, scheduling an appointment with our nutritionist, and workign with her in the weight room.

An athlete who noticeably puts on 10-12 lbs, and is slower than the year before is a different story than one who is very thin to begin with and probably doesn't need to lose weight. From what I gather from SWOAR blog, this young lady does not sound like she actually needed to lose weight.

Many coaches seem to think thinner=faster, no matter what. And they are inappropriate and unproductive in their approach to the subject. To have a frank, helpful discussion with an athlete about their weight and to direct them to health professionals is the right way to go about it.

In other words, for an adult male (or less often female) coach to make snarky comments to young women about being overweight, too heavy, etc, is silly. It's somewhat cruel and counterproductive. You're supposed to be an adult (and possibly a mentor to your athletes), not a schoolyard bully.

What you have stated, in my opinion, sounds like you handled it properly.

2) Runner really had NOT hit puberty in highschool & now she has, so it really is hard for her to lose weight. Some of the weight gain is natural, and she needs to deal & adapt. Maybe some of it is excess that she could benefit from losing.

3) Runner was anorexic or had some form of disordered eating in highschool - was well below her natural height/weight - and is now healthier. Don't screw it up & give her a complex.

So, clearly, each scenario is different. As others have stated: Leave the weight loss & diet to the nutritionists. Do not make snarky comments or put undo pressure on the runner. If anything ask "How are things going with the nutritionist?...Has it been helpful?...Are you still going?" THAT should be the full extent of your discussions on weight. Your conversations should be about training and lifestyle factors (like sleep) that impact training.

Where does this ridiculous coach-employer analogy come in? An employer can exert stronger pressures than a coach because their employee is responsible for the profit of the company or the well-being of others. Unless I've missed something, college track & field/cross-country has nothing to do with profit or the well-being of others. So, then, what's the coach's job, and more broadly, the point of college athletics?

As silly as the sounds when considering bigtime college hoops and football, the vast majority of college sports should still serve as part of the education. The track team isn't all that visible (in 99% of cases) and certainly doesn't turn a significant profit (in 99.99% of cases), so the purpose of the team has to be to further the education of the students on it. If anything, the runners employ the coach- even on fully funded teams, I would guess that on the balance, the athletes spend more in tuition than the amount of scholarship money spent on the team. But that last point isn't really that important. The thrust of this post is that non-revenue college sports- while no less serious- should not have the same pressures as football or basketball or indeed any job. The purpose of college track is to improve the educational experience by pursuing excellence. That sentence might seem extremely naive, but I can't think of any other possible justification for the existence of college track & field teams. In that light, the coach portrayed in this blog is despicable; he is doing nothing to enhance the education of his athletes. He is delusional; he somehow thinks that the scholarship money spent on his runners is an investment intended to return a tangible profit.